Nikema Williams
Democrat · GA-5 · 119th Congress
House Committee on Financial Services · House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure · House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress
Influence Score
51.5
Moderately exposed
↓ -3.8 vs 118th (55.3)
— ◊ —

This score measures financial influence across twelve categories. Each bar shows how this member compares to all others in Congress. Longer bars mean more exposure.

Score breakdown — twelve categories
Contributionsmoney from PACs (political action committees) and individual donors
4.6
/ 12
Outside spendingmoney spent by groups to help elect them
0.6
/ 6
Spent to help elect them
$119,300
Outside groups that spent to help elect this member — this drives the outside-spending bar above
Lobbyinghow hard lobbyists push the committees this member sits on
3.3
/ 10
Revolving door (1 lobbyist) former staff now working as lobbyists
0.6
/ 3
Vote alignmenthow often they vote the way their donors want
9.5
/ 12
Contribution timingmoney arriving near key votes
0.9
/ 6
Stock tradesbuying stocks in industries they regulate
0.0
/ 1
Dark moneyfunding from groups that hide their donors
< 0.1
/ 2
Outbound money distributionmoney this member sends out to the party and to colleagues
11.0
/ 16
Cluster network breadthhow many coordinated funding networks back this member
4.9
/ 10
Committee jurisdiction powerthe legislative reach of the committees this member sits on
2.0
/ 10
Foreign interestforeign-interest money — Israel-policy PACs and FARA-registered institutional lobbying allocated by committee jurisdiction
3.7
/ 12
Israel-policy PACs behind this score
AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE $10,997 direct
JSTREETPAC $2,100 direct
DMFI PAC $1,392 outside spending
FARA institutional lobbying
This member’s committees are targeted by $9.27M in lobbying from FARA-registered firms representing Japan, China, South Korea. This exposure is weighted at 0.2% of face value in the score — $19K.
— ◊ —
Score across four congresses
Score and tier for each Congress. Members are ranked against others in the same Congress, so tiers are comparable across rows. Raw scores reflect different data availability per Congress.
Congress Score Tier
116th · 2019-2021 &mdash;
117th · 2021-2023 47.3 Moderately exposed
118th · 2023-2025 55.3 Moderately exposed
119th · 2025-2027 51.5 Moderately exposed
— ◊ —
Biggest funding source
The single network behind the most money and influence
Total money from this network $82,500
Number of funding networks contributing 1
— ◊ —
Where most of the money comes from
What share of their combined contributions and outside spending comes from a single network. Party committees are excluded.
Share from this one network 3.7%
Amount from this network $55,000
Total from all networks $1,478,152
Networks contributing 253
— ◊ —
Who funds Williams
Every funding network we can measure, ranked by influence
score 51.5 · Moderately exposed · votes with them 90%
$934,802
— ◊ —
Does the money match their power?
Whether their money comes from the industries their committees actually oversee
Money from industries they regulate 6.5%
Extra weight when money matches their committees 1.50×
Share of outside spending tied to their policy areas 0.1%
— ◊ —
Money timed to key votes
Donations arriving near key votes in the policy areas this member regulates
Times money arrived near a vote 1
Money that arrived near votes $3K
Distinct donors 1
Distinct employers 1
Share of their total fundraising 0.70%
Biggest clusters of timed money
OPPORTUNITY FINANCIAL
20240918 · 1 contributions · Finance · 1d from vote (pre)
$3K
— ◊ —
Top Donors
Biggest sources of contributions, grouped by employer, this cycle
APOLLO GLOBAL MANAGEMENT
7 contributions · cycle 2022
$18K
THE HOME DEPOT
5 contributions · cycle 2022
$10K
GOLDMAN SACHS
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$10K
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERI
5 contributions · cycle 2022
$7K
THE HOME DEPOT
1 contributions · cycle 2026
$7K
CROWNE
3 contributions · cycle 2022
$7K
PERENNIAL PROPERTIES
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
RADCO
2 contributions · cycle 2024
$7K
CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
9 contributions · cycle 2024
$6K
EQUIFAX
5 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
ALPINE INVESTORS
2 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
FIELD HANDS PRODUCTION
2 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
LIVE OAK CAPITAL
2 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
1 contributions · cycle 2022
$6K
BENCHMARK MANAGEMENT
3 contributions · cycle 2024
$6K
MACK II
4 contributions · cycle 2022
$5K
HALPERN
2 contributions · cycle 2026
$5K
CROWNE
4 contributions · cycle 2024
$5K
KING SPALDING
6 contributions · cycle 2024
$5K
CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
8 contributions · cycle 2022
$4K
Where the outside money comes from
How much of the outside spending for and against Nikema Williams comes from groups that disclose their donors versus groups that hide them
Total outside spending received $60K
Disclosed outside spending $60K
Dark-money outside spending $486
Share that is dark money 0.80%
Dark money tied to their policy areas $0
Groups hiding their donors 2
By funding network
PENN PROGRESS, INC.
for them $112K · against them $0 · 4 transactions
$112K
DEMOCRACY PAC
for them $18K · against them $0 · 15 transactions
$18K
CARE IN ACTION PAC
for them $7K · against them $0 · 3 transactions
$7K
SEIU COPE (SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION)
for them $5K · against them $0 · 4 transactions
$5K
OUR FUTURE IS BLACK PAC
for them $5K · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$5K
ASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND PAC
for them $4K · against them $0 · 6 transactions
$4K
DMFI PAC
for them $1K · against them $0 · 1 transactions
$1K
MOMSRISING TOGETHER
for them $385 · against them $0 · 1 transactions
$385
#VOTEPROCHOICE PAC
for them $371 · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$371
EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND)
for them $144 · against them $0 · 1 transactions
$144
HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN EQUALITY VOTES PAC
for them $53 · against them $0 · 4 transactions
$53
COLOROFCHANGE PAC
for them $30 · against them $0 · 1 transactions
$30
SIERRA CLUB INDEPENDENT ACTION
for them $20 · against them $0 · 2 transactions
$20
Groups that hide their donors
2 smaller groups under $500
tiny cost-allocation expenditures, not listed individually
$486
Likely donors behind the dark money supporting this member Inferred
Donors who fund the disclosed PACs in the same network as the hidden groups above. "Coverage" is how many of that network's disclosed groups a donor funds — the more they fund, the more likely they also back the hidden group.
NEVADANS FOR STEVEN HORSFORD
NV · 1 dark entity
coverage 21.0%
$80K
TITUS FOR CONGRESS
NV · 1 dark entity
coverage 21.0%
$80K
SUSIE LEE FOR CONGRESS
NV · 1 dark entity
coverage 21.0%
$79K
GEORGE SOROS
SOROS FUND MANAGEMENT · NY · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$525.74M
SMP
DC · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$81.00M
BLACKPAC
DC · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$47.25M
AB PAC
DC · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$25.50M
HMP
DC · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$15.00M
HOUSE MAJORITY PAC
DC · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$15.00M
CARE IN ACTION PAC
NY · 1 dark entity
coverage 14.0%
$6.60M
— ◊ —
Pro-Israel network donors
This counts contributions to this member from individuals whose FEC filings also show contributions to one of the 16 pro-Israel political action committees tracked by the Index. It is a measure of donor overlap — not a claim about why any individual gave, and not part of the influence score.

102 individuals who also gave to pro-Israel PACs contributed $313K to Nikema Williams across 158 contributions.

Total from shared contributors $313K
Shared contributors 102
Contributions 158
By cycle
Cycle Shared donors Gifts Total
2022 57 78 $167K
2024 47 64 $117K
2026 14 16 $30K
— ◊ —
Revolving Door
1 former staff member who worked for Nikema Williams or the committees they serve are now registered lobbyists.
Lobbyist Former position Firm Clients Filings Years
KENT WILLIAMS State Senator representing the District 30. Senator Williams joined me as a cour… NADIK CONSULTING 1 1 2025–2025
— ◊ —

Nikema Williams sits in the middle of this Congress on the index. There is a measured sponsor relationship, but the vote-alignment signal is weaker — money flows; the votes do not follow in lockstep.

Data: FEC (Federal Election Commission) filings · 118th–119th Congress · lobbying disclosures · VoteView recorded votes
All findings derived programmatically from public records · No prior knowledge required